Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Oregon opinions name it 2 courts 2014–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oregon courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Langleygreen2 sentences2022In addition, before a trial court can conclude that a defendant has waived his right to counsel through misconduct, the defendant must have received “an advance warning that a repetition of behav- ior that amounts to misconduct will result in the defendant having to proceed pro se.” Id. at 670 . 2018And the Court of Appeals suggested that the waiver could be through misconduct after warnings, observing that "some state and federal courts have held that a defendant may impliedly waive his or her Sixth Amendment right to counsel by engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship if the defendant has received an advance warning that a repetition of behavior that amounts to misconduct will result in the defendant waiving the right to counsel." Id. (citing State v. Langley , 351 Or. 652 , 669-70, 273 P.3d 901 (2012) ). | 1 | 5 |
State v. Guerrerogreen2 sentences2019We have previously emphasized that an advance warning requires more than just “a mere showing that the defendant has engaged in past or present misconduct.” Guerrero, 277 Or App at 846 (inter- nal quotation marks omitted). 2017See State v. Hightower, 361 Or 412, 417 , 393 P3d 224 (2017) (“a valid waiver of the right to counsel must be preceded by a warning concerning the ‘dangers and disadvantages of self-representation’” (quoting Meyrick, 313 Or at 133 )); State v. Guerrero, 277 Or App 837, 845 , 373 P3d 1127 (2016) (“[I]n order for the advance warning requirement to be meaningful, a defendant must understand the risks and disadvantages of self-representation before he engages in the additional misconduct that forms the predicate for a finding of implied waiver.” (Emphasis in original.)). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Meyrickgreen1 sentence2017See State v. Hightower, 361 Or 412, 417 , 393 P3d 224 (2017) (“a valid waiver of the right to counsel must be preceded by a warning concerning the ‘dangers and disadvantages of self-representation’” (quoting Meyrick, 313 Or at 133 )); State v. Guerrero, 277 Or App 837, 845 , 373 P3d 1127 (2016) (“[I]n order for the advance warning requirement to be meaningful, a defendant must understand the risks and disadvantages of self-representation before he engages in the additional misconduct that forms the predicate for a finding of implied waiver.” (Emphasis in original.)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hightowergreen2 sentences2017See State v. Hightower, 361 Or 412, 417 , 393 P3d 224 (2017) (“a valid waiver of the right to counsel must be preceded by a warning concerning the ‘dangers and disadvantages of self-representation’” (quoting Meyrick, 313 Or at 133 )); State v. Guerrero, 277 Or App 837, 845 , 373 P3d 1127 (2016) (“[I]n order for the advance warning requirement to be meaningful, a defendant must understand the risks and disadvantages of self-representation before he engages in the additional misconduct that forms the predicate for a finding of implied waiver.” (Emphasis in original.)). 2017See State v. Hightower, 361 Or 412, 417 , 393 P3d 224 (2017) (“a valid waiver of the right to counsel must be preceded by a warning concerning the ‘dangers and disadvantages of self-representation’” (quoting Meyrick, 313 Or at 133 )); State v. Guerrero, 277 Or App 837, 845 , 373 P3d 1127 (2016) (“[I]n order for the advance warning requirement to be meaningful, a defendant must understand the risks and disadvantages of self-representation before he engages in the additional misconduct that forms the predicate for a finding of implied waiver.” (Emphasis in original.)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC v. Sanders
green
1 sentence2026Langley III set forth three r equirements that must be met to establish waiver by conduct: “(1) engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship that defeats the ability of counsel to carry out the representation function; (2) an advance warning to the defendant that continuation of [their] abusive behav- ior would result in being forced to proceed pro se and; (3) a reasonable opportunity for the defendant to present [their] position on the facts in a manner that permits, if appropri- ate, the safeguarding of confidential communications and trial strategy from public disclos | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Clardy
green
2 sentences2026Langley III set forth three r equirements that must be met to establish waiver by conduct: “(1) engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship that defeats the ability of counsel to carry out the representation function; (2) an advance warning to the defendant that continuation of [their] abusive behav- ior would result in being forced to proceed pro se and; (3) a reasonable opportunity for the defendant to present [their] position on the facts in a manner that permits, if appropri- ate, the safeguarding of confidential communications and trial strategy from public disclos 2026Langley III set forth three r equirements that must be met to establish waiver by conduct: “(1) engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship that defeats the ability of counsel to carry out the representation function; (2) an advance warning to the defendant that continuation of [their] abusive behav- ior would result in being forced to proceed pro se and; (3) a reasonable opportunity for the defendant to present [their] position on the facts in a manner that permits, if appropri- ate, the safeguarding of confidential communications and trial strategy from public disclos | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Stanton
green
1 sentence2022Such a warning “is necessary to alert the defendant to the fact that a repeti- tion of demonstrated misconduct may result in a waiver of Cite as 369 Or 707 (2022) 717 the right to counsel, rather than some other consequence.” Id.2 In this case, there were three motions involving the representation of defendant that were pending before the trial court at the same time: (1) defendant had moved for substitute counsel on the ground that Lee-Mandlin was not providing adequate representation; (2) Lee-Mandlin had moved to withdraw on the ground that, under the Rules of Professional Conduct, she could | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Menefee
green
1 sentence2018And the Court of Appeals suggested that the waiver could be through misconduct after warnings, observing that "some state and federal courts have held that a defendant may impliedly waive his or her Sixth Amendment right to counsel by engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship if the defendant has received an advance warning that a repetition of behavior that amounts to misconduct will result in the defendant waiving the right to counsel." Id. (citing State v. Langley , 351 Or. 652 , 669-70, 273 P.3d 901 (2012) ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Argersinger v. Hamlin
green
2 sentences2014Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 US 25, 37 , 92 S Ct 2006 , 32 L Ed 2d 530 (1972); cf. Langley, 351 Or at 669-70 (noting that some state and federal courts have held that a defendant may impliedly waive his or her Sixth Amendment right to counsel by engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship if the defendant has received an advance warning that a repetition of behavior that amounts to misconduct will result in the defendant waiving the right to counsel). 2014Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 US 25, 37 , 92 S Ct 2006 , 32 L Ed 2d 530 (1972); cf. Langley, 351 Or at 669-70 (noting that some state and federal courts have held that a defendant may impliedly waive his or her Sixth Amendment right to counsel by engaging in repeated misconduct in the attorney-client relationship if the defendant has received an advance warning that a repetition of behavior that amounts to misconduct will result in the defendant waiving the right to counsel). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.